I think the Bulls beat a lot of teams that would have been better than them if Jordan had player only every other game. If one superstar makes your average team better than the other then you win. I have no problem with this.

I don't think anyone is getting the point I am trying to make. Say team B has a really, really good team, and has a pretty good stable of pitchers, but has no Allen or such. Then they have to play team A with a Allen or such throwing, and because of that one girl, team B has no chance to win, but the team itself is a much better team, and they play a much better brand of ball. At least in Baseball, to get to the State semi-finals you have to play a best of three series, and you have to pitch a different pitcher, so it is your team that wins, not beasue you have that one great pitcher who throws each and every game. I just think, one player shouldn't be the reason for winining a state tournament.

 

I get what you say but you can't compare baseball and softball. Secondly, if team b was better than team A (allen) then they should be able to beat her. Third, how many state titles does Ryle have?

I don't think anyone is getting the point I am trying to make. Say team B has a really, really good team, and has a pretty good stable of pitchers, but has no Allen or such. Then they have to play team A with a Allen or such throwing, and because of that one girl, team B has no chance to win, but the team itself is a much better team, and they play a much better brand of ball. At least in Baseball, to get to the State semi-finals you have to play a best of three series, and you have to pitch a different pitcher, so it is your team that wins, not beasue you have that one great pitcher who throws each and every game. I just think, one player shouldn't be the reason for winining a state tournament.

 

I think we get your point. But it is correct baseball & softball are not the same in some ways. Allen is good but it still takes her team getting a runner across 4 to win a ball game its still a team effort. Memys you come from a different part of the country. What was the number of quality pitchers on a above average team.

Here's a view from a casual fan only, as my daughter plays another sport.

 

I went to my 1st fast pitch game a few years back, and thought WOW!!!, that's amazing. I was mesmerized by the pitcher, so I went back for another. But after the 5th game, I realized I only saw maybe 10 hits, and half of those never left the infield. So I got kinda BORED, even though I was cheering for my daughters school.

 

My sister played slow pitch for the same high school in the 70's and 80's, and it really was more enjoyable to me. I know it would be different if my kid played, and I loved watching fast pitch on TV, but they entertained you in other ways.

 

But it will never go back, so I wish ALL levels of fast pitch would look at ways to make the game more interesting. Major league Baseball did by lowering the pitching mound 5" in 1969, to help the pitchers out. That worked.

As I said earlier - To know the game is to love the game ! This sport is not intended ,IMO,to be a high scoring game .It is the strategy of the game that makes it different ,IMO.A 1-0,2-1 game where the tying run was left at 3 rd and a great play to end it will bring me back everytime .Does it happen alot ? NO,not enough ,but it does .

 

If you like offense ,then slow-pitch will be your thing .It also has some strategy ,but not like fast pitch .Bunt coverage ,stealing ,DELAY steal ,it's all in the game .

 

To me fast-pitch is very interesting .I also played slow-pitch 8 days a week ,if you will ,for about 7 to 8 years .

I'm not saying I need tons of scoring. My daughter plays field hockey, and led her team in scoring last season, with a whopping 7 goals. Half of our games usually have at least 1 team scoring ZERO, so I get the defensive angle. Fast pitch is very interesting, it's just not always exciting. Most non-parent or non-coach fans won't be looking at bunt coverage, delay steal etc. I just happened to see four of five shutouts, so maybe my logic is skewed.

I'm not saying I need tons of scoring. My daughter plays field hockey, and led her team in scoring last season, with a whopping 7 goals. Half of our games usually have at least 1 team scoring ZERO, so I get the defensive angle. Fast pitch is very interesting, it's just not always exciting. Most non-parent or non-coach fans won't be looking at bunt coverage, delay steal etc. I just happened to see four of five shutouts, so maybe my logic is skewed.

 

Understood ! I happen to be a parent who watches these kind of things .I find it interesting how teams cover things differently . May be I am just warped that way . I can see how the common fan or parent will find it boring .I just hope others see it the way I do .

 

Example in Baseball, Dixie has an outstanding pitcher in Matt Nichols. If Matt were allowed to pitch each and every inning of each and every Dixie's game, Dixie would win the ninth region, but the rules only allow him to throw only so many innings.

 

The kids arm would fall off...